Excerpt of Dr. Ravi Zacharias' speech:
Cultures reduce themselves to three forms of manifestation
on Moral Issues. Based on this backdrop three forms, I want you to follow me
carefully the words are big but the ideas will become clear….. There are three
kinds of culture, theonomous, heteronomous , and autonomous.
Theonomous is not a theocracy, Theos meaning God and nomos meaning law. The idea in a theonomous culture is that God’s law is so self-evident within the human heart that there are some imperatives within you that find a consensus in society. That’s God’s law in you , the nomos the law of the Theos, God, that is so ingrained in your soul that there is an emerging consensus within society of certain norms that everyone agrees that are noble or the opposite of them being evil and not to be pursued. If there is a culture today that comes close to a theonomous culture, I would say it is India. They refer to themselves in Hindi “as the people of the soil”, their music talks about it, their lyricists talk about it, their poetry talks about it, the values that the culture tries to hold onto, principally respect for the parents, love for the children, the transmission from generation to generation, the closeness of the family tie. All of those values they consider ingrained in them. They say it is deep within them. There is a theonomous nature to it. It’s not identical but it is close to a theonomous culture.
Then you get heteronomous culture. What is a heteronomous culture. Heteros meaning different and nomos--- law, a different law, where there are two distinct sets in operation. There is the controlling few and the masses down here. In secular terminology Marxism is a heteronomous culture where the handful at the top dictate everything for the masses below. In religious terms Islam functions as a heteronomous culture. Either the Ilama or the Imam or whoever, the dictates are given to you from above and the masses then are told to follow along. There is a heteronomy to it, the law comes from above dictated to the masses whether you want to do it or not.
And then there is an autonomous culture. The autonomous culture, autos meaning self, nomos meaning law, you’re a self-law. You’re a law unto yourself. You follow your individual autonomy. America would not fit into a theonomous culture, it would not fit into a heteronomous culture by definition. We pride ourselves that we are an autonomous culture. So here is the question, if we are an autonomous culture do we respect the autonomy of each individual? If I respect a person who disagrees with me and wants to live a totally materialistic life, ought not that compliment to be returned and give me the privilege of having my autonomy and my choice to follow God. And my choice to follow where I believe the truth has lead. Autonomous cultures pride themselves on being self-driven, individually driven. But I’ll tell you what: there are some questions that bait the hook… will turn the questions toward people like me or others force us to answer it under the guise of an autonomous culture. But the moment my view is not in keeping with the view that wants to be heard, it switched into a heteronomous culture, and I’m dictated to and this is exactly what I need to believe and not what I actually believe. This bait-and-switch that has taken place is striking, absolutely striking. So we don’t go with the theonomous culture here, we don’t go with the heteronomous culture, we claim to go with an autonomous culture. But autonomous cultures need to be mutually respectful. And I think what the Duke of Edinburgh once said, he said freedom can be destroyed not only by its retraction but also by its abuse. And so I leave you with two thoughts: in the first one I’ll do a little bit of a voice play here not in any way to be unkind but because it was so beautiful and so sweet, so sweetly done. In the 1980s when the cold war was still on, my wife and a couple of colleagues and I were invited to go to Russia somewhere in Moscow. Quite a cold day, a foggy day and we went and my host said would you like to have lunch, I said sure. So we had lunch. And things were sparse then everything was a different consistency of Mayonnaise, mayonnaise bound this mayonnaise bound that, Mayonnaise it just made you feel full. But you know … people were struggling, you looked at the empty shelves and you said what are we to mock that…. The waitress was a lovely Russian gal, bilingual, and she spoke in a sweet voice and we finished our lunch. She leaned over and in a very sweet voice, she said would you like to have some dessert. So my host said things have changed we can also have dessert. I said that will be lovely, what do you have? She said Ice cream. We said what else? Ice cream. We said okay. Yeah we’d like some ice cream. What flavor would you like? We said what flavor do you have? Vanilla. We said any other flavor? No, Vanilla. So the man on the left said would you like to have vanilla ice cream for dessert? We said yes we would. He said, you know the genius , she actually walked away from here thinking she gave you a choice of desserts. That’s what this game of tolerance can become. You’re actually given the idea that you have a choice. Is it true? It ought to be true. And that’s why Os Guinness is right, he thinks civility is a better word than tolerance. Where you may have learned to accept what another person believes but you don’t have to celebrate it and in a civil manner you disagree.
Theonomous is not a theocracy, Theos meaning God and nomos meaning law. The idea in a theonomous culture is that God’s law is so self-evident within the human heart that there are some imperatives within you that find a consensus in society. That’s God’s law in you , the nomos the law of the Theos, God, that is so ingrained in your soul that there is an emerging consensus within society of certain norms that everyone agrees that are noble or the opposite of them being evil and not to be pursued. If there is a culture today that comes close to a theonomous culture, I would say it is India. They refer to themselves in Hindi “as the people of the soil”, their music talks about it, their lyricists talk about it, their poetry talks about it, the values that the culture tries to hold onto, principally respect for the parents, love for the children, the transmission from generation to generation, the closeness of the family tie. All of those values they consider ingrained in them. They say it is deep within them. There is a theonomous nature to it. It’s not identical but it is close to a theonomous culture.
Then you get heteronomous culture. What is a heteronomous culture. Heteros meaning different and nomos--- law, a different law, where there are two distinct sets in operation. There is the controlling few and the masses down here. In secular terminology Marxism is a heteronomous culture where the handful at the top dictate everything for the masses below. In religious terms Islam functions as a heteronomous culture. Either the Ilama or the Imam or whoever, the dictates are given to you from above and the masses then are told to follow along. There is a heteronomy to it, the law comes from above dictated to the masses whether you want to do it or not.
And then there is an autonomous culture. The autonomous culture, autos meaning self, nomos meaning law, you’re a self-law. You’re a law unto yourself. You follow your individual autonomy. America would not fit into a theonomous culture, it would not fit into a heteronomous culture by definition. We pride ourselves that we are an autonomous culture. So here is the question, if we are an autonomous culture do we respect the autonomy of each individual? If I respect a person who disagrees with me and wants to live a totally materialistic life, ought not that compliment to be returned and give me the privilege of having my autonomy and my choice to follow God. And my choice to follow where I believe the truth has lead. Autonomous cultures pride themselves on being self-driven, individually driven. But I’ll tell you what: there are some questions that bait the hook… will turn the questions toward people like me or others force us to answer it under the guise of an autonomous culture. But the moment my view is not in keeping with the view that wants to be heard, it switched into a heteronomous culture, and I’m dictated to and this is exactly what I need to believe and not what I actually believe. This bait-and-switch that has taken place is striking, absolutely striking. So we don’t go with the theonomous culture here, we don’t go with the heteronomous culture, we claim to go with an autonomous culture. But autonomous cultures need to be mutually respectful. And I think what the Duke of Edinburgh once said, he said freedom can be destroyed not only by its retraction but also by its abuse. And so I leave you with two thoughts: in the first one I’ll do a little bit of a voice play here not in any way to be unkind but because it was so beautiful and so sweet, so sweetly done. In the 1980s when the cold war was still on, my wife and a couple of colleagues and I were invited to go to Russia somewhere in Moscow. Quite a cold day, a foggy day and we went and my host said would you like to have lunch, I said sure. So we had lunch. And things were sparse then everything was a different consistency of Mayonnaise, mayonnaise bound this mayonnaise bound that, Mayonnaise it just made you feel full. But you know … people were struggling, you looked at the empty shelves and you said what are we to mock that…. The waitress was a lovely Russian gal, bilingual, and she spoke in a sweet voice and we finished our lunch. She leaned over and in a very sweet voice, she said would you like to have some dessert. So my host said things have changed we can also have dessert. I said that will be lovely, what do you have? She said Ice cream. We said what else? Ice cream. We said okay. Yeah we’d like some ice cream. What flavor would you like? We said what flavor do you have? Vanilla. We said any other flavor? No, Vanilla. So the man on the left said would you like to have vanilla ice cream for dessert? We said yes we would. He said, you know the genius , she actually walked away from here thinking she gave you a choice of desserts. That’s what this game of tolerance can become. You’re actually given the idea that you have a choice. Is it true? It ought to be true. And that’s why Os Guinness is right, he thinks civility is a better word than tolerance. Where you may have learned to accept what another person believes but you don’t have to celebrate it and in a civil manner you disagree.
A cartoon I saw years ago with Dennis the Menace sitting in
front of his lemonade stand. Sign: All you can drink for ten cents. So a little
guy stops and puts up his ten cents. Dennis the menace takes up the glass and
pours a wee bit into his glass and gives it to him. The next frame of the
cartoon he’s looking bewildered saying what… you know in the third frame of the
cartoon Dennis is saying I says it’s all you can drink for ten cents that’s who
says it’s all you can drink for ten cents. Is that what tolerance is becoming? We
tell you what it all means that’s who tells you what it all really means. I
hope not.
Daniel Yankelovich his article ended by the survey of many
America couples and he ended by saying the stakes are high. If you feel it is
imperative to fill all your needs and if these needs are contradictory or in
conflict with those of others or simply unfillable and frustration inevitably
follows… to Abby and to Mark, as well, self-fulfillment means having a career
and marriage and children and sexual freedom and autonomy and being liberal and
having money and choosing nonconformity and insisting on social justice and
enjoying city life and country living and simplicity graciousness and reading
and good friends and on and on. But indeed choose not to be fulfilled by being
more autonomous. Indeed to move too far in this direction is to risk psychosis,
the ultimate form of autonomy. The injunction that to find one’s self one must
lose one’s self contains a truth that any seeker of self-fulfillment needs to
grasp. The injunction that to find one’s self one must lose one’s self contains
a truth that any seeker of truth needs to grasp. I could have saved him
millions of dollars of research if he had read the Gospel of John. That if any
man come unto me and deny himself and pickup his cross and follow me.
Thanks to source:
No comments:
Post a Comment